Grading State Disclosure 2005 Logo Graphic

M o n t a n a

Grade
Rank
F
46

golden bar divider

Subcategories
Grade
Rank
Campaign Disclosure Law
A-
3
Electronic Filing Program
F
38
Disclosure Content Accessibility
F
48
Online Contextual & Technical Usability
F
49

Grading Process green cube Subcategory Weighting green cube Methodology green cube Glossary

golden bar divider

The State of Disclosure in Montana

Montana received an overall F for the third year in a row, and its rank dropped from 43 to 46. While it ranks near the bottom in three of the four categories of the study, Montana’s campaign disclosure law is still one of the best in the country and lays the groundwork for what could be a much better overall disclosure program.

Candidates in Montana are required to disclose details, including occupation and employer, about contributors giving $35 or more. Last-minute contributions are reported prior to Election Day, but last-minute independent expenditures are not. Expenditure disclosure is excellent and requires the reporting of subvendor details and accrued expenses. Other strengths include the filing schedule, reporting of loan details, and enforcement.  The Office of Commissioner of Political Practices has been developing an electronic filing system since 2004, and reported in June that work on a web-based filing interface was nearing completion. The agency expects to debut the new program in late 2005.

Montana’s grade in the Disclosure Content Accessibility category reflects the fact that there is currently zero campaign finance data available on the disclosure agency’s web site. Hopefully that situation will change when the Commissioner’s office launches electronic filing; the agency also reported in June that it had completed work on the database that will store electronically-filed data. Access to paper copies of disclosure records, from the Commissioner’s office in Helena and from county election offices throughout the state, is very good.

It is impossible to earn a good grade in Online Contextual and Technical Usability if a state’s disclosure web site contains no campaign finance data, and the absence of such data on Montana’s site is why its grade and rank in this category are so low. Again, if the introduction of electronic filing results in the introduction of actual data to its web site, the site’s usability will improve. There is already some good contextual information on the Commissioner of Political Practices’ web site, which was redesigned in fall 2005.

Quick Fix: Add a document to the disclosure site that lists total amounts raised and spent by statewide and legislative candidates. In the absence of itemized campaign finance records online, a basic overview would at least give site visitors some sense of candidates’ campaign activity.

Editor’s Pick: Election Contribution Limits Summary. This document is thorough, and easy to find on the disclosure web site. View image

Disclosure Agency: Commissioner of Political Practices
Disclosure Web Site:
http://politicalpractices.mt.gov

View another state's summary:

Back to the Grading State Disclosure home page


This page was first published on October 26, 2005
| Last updated on October 26, 2005
copyright ©
Campaign Disclosure Project. All rights reserved.